English
English version Does it cease awaiting the fruit? If it ceases awaiting the arising of the fruit, then it is called permanence; if it ceases without awaiting the arising of the fruit, then it is called annihilation. Since it is either annihilation or permanence, then cause and effect cannot be established. What is taken as the principle of this sutra? Moreover, since it is either annihilation or permanence, then it obstructs the wonderful Dharma of the One Vehicle. How can an obstructing Dharma be used as the principle? Furthermore, if it is said that a single thought of goodness can continue to the attainment of Buddhahood, does it continue after ceasing, or does it continue without ceasing? If it continues after ceasing, then there is the ability to continue, but nothing to be continued. If it continues without ceasing, then there is something to be continued, but no ability to continue. How can it continue to the attainment of Buddhahood? Examining it with sutras and treatises, there is no such cause and effect. With whom is this the same or different? Secondly, even if there is such a cause and effect, they would say that there is such a cause and effect in principle, which becomes something to be attained. The sutra says, 'Those who have something to be attained have no path and no fruit.' What is taken as the principle? Moreover, those who have something to be attained, the sutra says, 'Do not move, do not go out,' which is not the meaning of the Vehicle at all. How can it be used as the principle of the sutra? The *Nirvana Sutra* says, 'Those who have something to be attained are called ignorance.' How can ignorance be used as the principle of the Sutra of Equal and Great Wisdom? 'Those who have something to be attained are called the twenty-five existences.' How can the twenty-five existences be used as the principle of the Sutra of Numerous Virtues? Question: The *Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra* and the *Nirvana Sutra* can naturally discuss having something to be attained or having nothing to be attained. The *Lotus Sutra* clarifies that even the slightest good deed, such as bowing the head or raising a hand, can all achieve Buddhahood. Would it reject the good deeds of having something to be attained, considering it not to be the One Vehicle? Answer: Having something to be attained and having nothing to be attained can be said to be the ultimate goal of many sutras, the profound treasury of the sage's observation, the root of distinguishing gain and loss, and the indication of the partiality and orthodoxy of Buddhism. Does it not encompass the *Lotus Sutra*? Moreover, this very sutra text itself distinguishes having something to be attained and having nothing to be attained. Now, let me briefly cite three passages: First, at the very beginning, it states, 'I use countless expedient means to guide sentient beings to be free from all attachments.' Second, later in the *Chapter on Universal Gateway*, Purna praises the Buddha, saying, 'It is wonderful that the World-Honored One uses wisdom and expedient means to extract sentient beings from everywhere they are attached.' Those who are attached everywhere are attached to the Small Vehicle, attached to the Great Vehicle, attached to the Three Vehicles, and attached to the One Vehicle. Therefore, it is known that this sutra precisely clarifies the principle of having nothing to be attained. Moreover, this sutra vigorously proclaims tranquility and extinction, such as saying, 'This Dharma cannot be shown in words and appearances.' --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
寂灭”，又云“诸法从本来常自寂灭相”，寂灭相即是无得实相异名，不应言此经辨有所得也。三者、则用此经文责之，若言乘是因者，是义不然，今讲《法花》宜以《法花》为证。《法花》明三车一车皆悉是果，故〈譬喻品〉云“今此三车皆是在门外”，即三界外果德为车，故下合譬谈皆以果德合之，举涅槃合羊车，举自然惠合鹿车，举佛果四德智合牛车，举大涅槃果德合大车，故云“皆以如来灭度而灭度之”，又举佛果众德以合大车，故云“悉与诸佛解脱三昧”，故名等赐大车，则知三车一车皆是果乘非因乘矣。又此经秤名“妙法”，妙法者佛果德无不圆、累无不尽，故名为妙；因德未圆、累犹未尽，不名为妙。则应以果为正宗，因非正宗也。次问第二，若偏以佛果为乘者，是亦不然。诸子求车，佛即赐车，诸子得车即诸子得果，故云乘是宝车直至道场，即知以因为乘宁非乘也。又《大品》等经皆明乘是因义，何得偏用果为乘耶？次破第三，因果为宗，是亦不然。此经初分始终盛谈果德，今略引三证：一者、开宗略说叹佛智惠甚深，二者、广说开佛知见，三者、多宝证说叹大惠平等，故知初分始终盛谈果德，非明因矣。以此众义求三家解释并皆不成，故无可与同异。 问： 何故要须洗破诸计？ ‘寂灭’（Śūnyatā，空性），又说‘诸法从本来常自寂灭相’，寂灭相即是无所得实相的另一个名称，不应该说这部经辨析有所得的道理。第三，可以用这部经的经文来责问：如果说乘坐的是因，这个道理是不对的。现在讲解《法华经》，应该以《法华经》为证据。《法华经》阐明三车一车都是果，所以〈譬喻品〉中说‘今此三车皆是在门外’，就是说三界外的果德是车。因此，下面的比喻都用果德来对应，用涅槃对应羊车，用自然惠对应鹿车，用佛果的四德智对应牛车，用大涅槃的果德对应大车，所以说‘皆以如来灭度而灭度之’，又用佛果的众多功德来对应大车，所以说‘悉与诸佛解脱三昧’，所以叫做平等赐予大车，这样就知道三车一车都是果乘，不是因乘。而且这部经的名称是‘妙法’，妙法是指佛果的功德没有不圆满的，业障没有不消除的，所以叫做妙；因地的功德没有圆满，业障还没有消除，不能叫做妙。那么就应该以果为正宗，因不是正宗。其次回答第二个问题，如果偏执地认为佛果是乘，这也是不对的。诸子求车，佛就赐予车，诸子得到车就是诸子得到果，所以说乘坐宝车直至道场，就知道以因为乘，难道不是乘吗？而且《大品般若经》（Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra）等经典都阐明乘是因的含义，怎么能偏执地用果作为乘呢？其次反驳第三个观点，认为因果为宗，这也是不对的。这部经从开始到结束都在盛大地阐述果德，现在简略地引用三个证据：第一，开宗明义时略说赞叹佛的智慧非常深奥；第二，广泛地阐述开佛知见；第三，多宝佛（Prabhūtaratna）现身证明并赞叹大智慧的平等，所以知道从开始到结束都在盛大地阐述果德，不是阐明因。用这些道理来考察三家的解释，都不能成立，所以没有什么可以赞同或反对的。 问： 为什么要洗刷破除各种计较？
English
‘Śūnyatā’ (Emptiness), and it is said, ‘All dharmas are inherently in a state of quiescence from the beginning.’ The state of quiescence is another name for the true aspect of non-attainment. It should not be said that this sutra discusses the principle of attainment. Thirdly, this sutra can be used to question: If it is said that one rides on the cause, this principle is incorrect. Now, when explaining the *Lotus Sutra*, the *Lotus Sutra* should be used as evidence. The *Lotus Sutra* clarifies that the three vehicles and the one vehicle are all fruits. Therefore, in the <Parable> chapter, it says, ‘Now these three vehicles are all outside the gate,’ meaning that the fruit virtue outside the three realms is the vehicle. Therefore, the following metaphors all correspond to fruit virtues, with Nirvāṇa corresponding to the goat cart, spontaneous wisdom corresponding to the deer cart, the four virtues and wisdom of the Buddha fruit corresponding to the ox cart, and the fruit virtue of the Great Nirvāṇa corresponding to the great cart. Therefore, it is said, ‘All are liberated by the Nirvāṇa of the Tathāgata,’ and the numerous virtues of the Buddha fruit are used to correspond to the great cart. Therefore, it is called the equal bestowal of the great cart, thus knowing that the three vehicles and the one vehicle are all fruit vehicles, not causal vehicles. Moreover, the name of this sutra is ‘Wonderful Dharma.’ Wonderful Dharma refers to the Buddha fruit's virtues being complete and without deficiency, and karmic obstacles being completely eliminated, hence it is called wonderful. The virtues of the causal ground are not yet complete, and karmic obstacles have not yet been eliminated, so it cannot be called wonderful. Therefore, the fruit should be regarded as the primary principle, and the cause is not the primary principle. Secondly, to answer the second question, if one stubbornly believes that the Buddha fruit is the vehicle, this is also incorrect. The children seek vehicles, and the Buddha bestows vehicles. The children obtaining vehicles means the children obtaining the fruit. Therefore, it is said that riding the precious vehicle directly to the Bodhimaṇḍa, thus knowing that taking the cause as the vehicle, is it not a vehicle? Moreover, sutras such as the *Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra* all clarify that the vehicle is the meaning of the cause. How can one stubbornly use the fruit as the vehicle? Thirdly, to refute the third viewpoint, considering cause and effect as the principle is also incorrect. This sutra, from beginning to end, extensively expounds the virtues of the fruit. Now, briefly cite three pieces of evidence: First, at the beginning, it briefly praises the Buddha's wisdom as being extremely profound; second, it extensively expounds the opening of the Buddha's knowledge and vision; third, Prabhūtaratna (Many Treasures Buddha) appears to prove and praise the equality of great wisdom. Therefore, it is known that from beginning to end, it extensively expounds the virtues of the fruit, not expounding the cause. Using these principles to examine the explanations of the three schools, none of them can be established, so there is nothing to agree with or disagree with. Question: Why is it necessary to wash away and break through all calculations? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 答：
Chinese
若有因果等见即是有所得，有所得名之为粗，不名为妙；有所得名为非法，不名为法，有所得即是不净染着，非是莲花。今息因果等见即是无所得，无所得故名曰妙法、称为莲花，故是经宗。 问： 何以得知息有所得见即是妙法莲花耶？ 答： 今略引三证：一、《正观论》云“从因缘品来推求诸法，有亦无、无亦无、亦有亦无亦无、非有非无亦无，是名名如、法性、实际、涅槃”，故知求有所得因果，不可得即是妙法。二者、《法花论》释〈方便品〉云“我以无数方便引导众生令离诸着，著有四种：一者着界，谓三界等；二者着地，谓欲界地乃至灭尽定地；三者分着，谓在家着五欲、出家著名利；四者乘着，着小乘、着大乘等”。故知有所著不名妙法，无所著即是经宗。三者关中肇公《百论．序》云“萧焉无寄理自玄会，傥然靡据事不失真，变本之道着乎兹矣”，故知心无所依着即是妙法，为此经宗也。 第二、取而不破者，要须前来破洗有所得执断常心毕竟无遗，然后始得辨佛因缘假名方便用，若众生应闻因为宗得悟即为说因，应闻果为宗得悟者即为说果，应俱闻因果为宗得悟则为说因果。三世诸佛菩萨说经造论，意在众生得悟为正宗，而教无定也。 现代汉语译本 答： 如果执着于因果等观念，那就是有所得（有所执着），有所得就称为粗糙，不称为精妙；有所得就称为非法，不称为正法，有所得就是不干净的染污执着，不是莲花。现在止息因果等观念，就是无所得（没有执着），因为无所得，所以称为妙法、称为莲花，所以这是此经的宗旨。 问： 凭什么得知止息有所得的观念就是妙法莲花呢？ 答： 现在简略地引用三个证据：第一，《正观论》说：‘从因缘品来推求诸法，有也是空、无也是空、亦有亦无也是空、非有非无也是空，这叫做如、法性、实际、涅槃’，所以知道追求有所得的因果，不可得就是妙法。第二，《法华论》解释〈方便品〉说：‘我用无数方便引导众生离开各种执着，执着有四种：一是执着界（三界等）；二是执着地（欲界地乃至灭尽定地）；三是分别执着（在家执着五欲、出家执着名利）；四是乘执着（执着小乘、执着大乘等）’。所以知道有所执着不称为妙法，没有执着就是此经的宗旨。第三，关中肇公《百论．序》说：‘空寂无所寄托，真理自然显现，坦然没有依据，事相不失其真，改变根本的方法就在这里了’，所以知道心中没有依附执着就是妙法，是这部经的宗旨。 第二，采取而不破除，必须要先前破除洗涤有所得的执着、断常之心，彻底没有遗留，然后才能辨别佛的因缘假名方便之用。如果众生应该听闻以因为宗旨而得悟，就为他们说因；应该听闻以果为宗旨而得悟，就为他们说果；应该同时听闻因果为宗旨而得悟，就为他们说因果。三世诸佛菩萨说经造论，目的是让众生得悟作为正宗，而教法没有固定不变的。